lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/2] livepatch: add atomic replace
    On Wed, 18 Oct 2017, Miroslav Benes wrote:

    > 3. Drop immediate. It causes problems only and its advantages on x86_64
    > are theoretical. You would still need to solve the interaction with atomic
    > replace on other architecture with immediate preserved, but that may be
    > easier. Or we can be aggressive and drop immediate completely. The force
    > transition I proposed earlier could achieve the same.

    After brief off-thread discussion, I've been thinking about this a bit
    more and I also think that we should claim immediate "an experiment that
    failed", especially as the force functionality (which provides equal
    functionality from the userspace POV) will likely be there sonnish.

    Thanks,

    --
    Jiri Kosina
    SUSE Labs

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2017-10-22 17:13    [W:4.223 / U:0.072 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site